One of the reasons this bias is sometimes called the “Baader-Meinhof phenomenon” traces back to a curious anecdote from the 1990s. After learning about the Baader-Meinhof Group, Terry Mullen wrote a letter to the St. Paul Pioneer Press describing how he couldn’t help but notice references to them appearing everywhere he looked.

This relatable experience of suddenly seeing a newly-learned term pop up frequently resonated with others on the internet.

It wasn’t until 2005 that Stanford University linguist Arnold Zwicky established the name “Frequency Illusion.”

The illusion comes from two key cognitive biases at play – an innate drive to detect meaningful patterns amidst noise, and a tendency to actively seek out confirmatory information while overlooking contradictory data points. These mental blind spots are exacerbated in group contexts where a newfound shared awareness exponentially increases perceived frequency.

For teams tasked with evaluating options, making high-stakes decisions, or formulating strategy, the Frequency Illusion can dangerously skew judgments. A product team, for instance, may become so focused on a newly uncovered consumer insight that they distort its true representativeness across their customer base.

Software teams may inadvertently focus too much on new features that have been recently discussed, potentially misallocating resources away from more critical features that could impact the product.

When it comes to processing user feedback, teams might place undue importance on issues that have surfaced in recent conversations, distorting the development of product improvements.

During brainstorm sessions, recently mentioned ideas could be perceived as more relevant, inadvertently limiting the exploration of a wider array of creative solutions. Recognizing and mitigating the influence of this bias is crucial for teams to ensure they consider a balanced range of data and options in their decision-making processes.